Sentences with phrase «upon each individual as»

It rests upon each individual as verse 28 says to examine oneself before taking part in it.

Now although Hall considers this a «process» view of creativity, its emphasis upon the individual as «its own source of order and novelty» is more extreme than that in Whitehead's philosophy.

Not exact matches

The Board will annually designate a Board member as the Company's Financial Expert upon the recommendation of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee with consideration of the desires of individual directors.

It does not discuss all aspects of U.S. federal income taxation that may be relevant to particular holders in light of their particular circumstances or to holders subject to special rules under the Code (including, but not limited to, insurance companies, tax - exempt organizations, financial institutions, broker - dealers, partners in partnerships (or entities or arrangements treated as partnerships for U.S. federal income tax purposes) that hold HP Co. common stock, pass - through entities (or investors therein), traders in securities who elect to apply a mark - to - market method of accounting, stockholders who hold HP Co. common stock as part of a «hedge,» «straddle,» «conversion,» «synthetic security,» «integrated investment» or «constructive sale transaction,» individuals who receive HP Co. or Hewlett Packard Enterprise common stock upon the exercise of employee stock options or otherwise as compensation, holders who are liable for the alternative minimum tax or any holders who actually or constructively own 5 % or more of HP Co. common stock).

What is the best investment for retirement for you will depend upon your individual situation, of course, but as income producing options any of the following ten could be used as stand - alone solutions or in combination.

It defines pure capitalism as a system that grows among a group of completely free individuals and discusses why it is the only logical system upon which to structure a society.

I grew up in an ultra-orthodox Jewish neighborhood in Brooklyn, NY and I guess the only thing that infuriates me is these ultra-orthodox Jewish «chasidim» individuals will look upon a person, such as myself, as a gentile vs. a Jew only because I don't worship or practive the faith as they do.

Yet, thinkers from Edmund Burke to Russell Kirk have shown the deeply anti-conservative bases of the social contract theory of Lockean (and Hobbesian) origin, one that is premised upon a conception of human beings as naturally «free and independent,» as autonomous individuals who are thought to exist by nature detached from a web of relationships that include family, community, Church, region, and so on.

It is always good for nations, as well as for individuals, to go back to first principles — to take fire again from the fire that plainly burned in so many brave others who cast their lives upon the flames of patriotic duty.

So long as we depend upon the initiative of individuals actually to seek care, the bare availability of the care doesn't seem to matter.

The Book of Mormon is no different than the Bible in describing a curse set upon various individuals and their posterity as a means of setting said individuals and their posterity apart in some way.

Clearly the same is continuing as delivered by individuals passing judgement on Him today based upon the actions of people claiming to be his followers or not having a clear understanding of what His words really are in context.

My only problem with your article centers on the Traditions violation and in that the Traditions are based upon humility of the individual and primacy of AA as a whole, perhaps they would be worthy of consideration.

Our individual and communal wellbeing requires us to make use of nature prudentially, to understand nature well, and to tinker with nature cautiously, just as our too - often - too - dimly - perceived vocation as stewards also challenges us to act upon nature generously.

How various Christians approach that question seems to hinge upon whether they regard homosexuality as a matter of choice or as a developed condition or orientation over which the individual has little or no control.

He pointed out how, because of the dominant reductionist view of human nature, scientists are increasingly tempted to treat the human individual as «an object to be investigated, measured and experimented upon» rather than as an «irreducible subject».

At the same time, it would be in direct competition to the increasingly influential view that the dignity of any individual life is dependent upon the competency of the individual, as though a self with a poor quality of life has a life not worth living.

Earlier this week, 74 religious freedom groups (including Open Doors USA and Christian Solidarity Worldwide) and individuals — such as the Hudson Institute's Nina Shea, China Aid's Kody Kness, the Institute on Religion and Democracy's Faith McDonnell, and Northland's Joel Hunter — called upon the Senate to confirm Saperstein.

We are made male and female, man and woman, and attempts to blur distinctions under the seemingly innocuous term «gender» are really attempts to assert that sex should be seen as an autonomous human activity, something which has noother meaning than what the individual wishes to bestow upon it.

If the requisite disjunctive synthesis can not be explained by appeal to the doctrine that God values all possible worlds, this is not so much because evaluation is logically dependent upon gradations of importance, but because (accepting Christian's explanation of the absence of such gradations in the primordial nature) the logic of the doctrine itself entails that God be inextricably involved in the formation of actual worlds as «circles of convergence,» i.e., in «the orderings effected by individuals in the course of nature.»

The modern individual has too often subjugated the spontaneous to the orderly, the possible to the necessary, the enthusiastic to the reasonable, the wonderful to the regular.9 In yet another description, Keen identifies our current «dis - ease» as our inability to view life as a «story,» to integrate past, present, and future into a meaningful whole.10 The metaphysical myths of our tradition no longer confer identity upon us today.

While the occasions are indeed individual «creatures,» their distinct individuality depends upon eternal objects as forms of definiteness.

And if the society, as represented in the ruler, fails to ensure the rights of the individual, then the individual is entitled to insist upon his rights, and the ruler deserves God's condemnation and anger.

If on the social group as a whole Yahweh's wrath was falling, the punishment was an inevitable consequence of the way individuals were thinking — «Hear, O earth: behold, I will bring evil upon this people, even the fruit of their thoughts».

If I seal up the entry into my heart I must dwell in darkness — and not only I, my individual soul, but the whole universe in so far as its activity sustains my organism and awakens my consciousness, and in so far also as I act upon it in my turn so as to draw forth from it the materials of sensation, of ideas, of moral goodness, of holiness of life.

That he took our nature upon him does not imply that every individual person, in every conceivable situation, has Christ as his forerunner and is following in his steps.

If something so important for each individual is dependent upon accepting / rejecting a supposed scriptural «truth» (as you define it) then make the case for how it makes any sense at all that humans would be judged negatively for rejecting something they have no idea exists!!

For although certain principles of wear and dissolution, which apparently can not be prevented from growing more pronounced with age, seem to be inherent in the structure of our individual bodies, there is no indication of any similar factor in the global evolution of a living mass as large as the Noosphere, where the overriding evolutionary law seems to be that, of statistical necessity, it must simply converge upon itself.

Now the distinctions between «superior to actuality» and «superior even to possibility,» or between «superior to other possible individuals» and to «other possible states of oneself» (as an individual identical in spite of changes or alternate possible states), or again, between «superior in all,» «in some,» or «in no» respects of value — these distinctions are urged upon us by universal experience and common - sense modes of thought.

It is entirely possible that, at a time when very important decisions have to be made and acted upon for the good of humankind and the planet as a whole, far too many people will focus their attention on their own immediate vicinity and insist on claiming their individual right to act within it as they wish.

In other cases individuals such as Daniel and Mordecai are God's agents in bringing a just death upon guilty persons.

They rely upon the Qur» an and the Traditions of the Prophet and reject consensus (ijma) and individual interpretation (ijtihad) as sources of legislation.

(18) Emphasis can now be placed upon information - exchange relationships, rather than individuals as the unit of research analysis.

The liberation that love engenders and the claim that it lays upon us are absolutely binding; they are kerygmatic address, which, as Bultmann interprets Paul, «accosts each individual, throwing the person himself into question by rendering his self - understanding problematic, and demanding a decision of hint» The kerygma can be defined as «absolute» in two respects.

There have been men before now, who have supposed Christian love was so diffusive as not to admit of concentration upon individuals; so that we ought to love all men equally.

Now the situation is one where Christ is alone, so that someone as an individual alone with Christ stepped up to Him and spat upon Him: the man was never born and will never be born, who possesses the courage or the audacity to do this: that is the truth.

For Schleiermacher, as we have seen, 20 the essence of religion lay in the individual's feeling of dependence upon the Infinite.

On the contrary, he looks upon this easiness as a temptation and a snare and he learns earnestness in order as an individual to be concerned about his eternal responsibility.

Upon careful analysis, at least ten such points become apparent: (1) Blake alone among Christian artists has created a whole mythology; (2) he was the first to discover the final loss of paradise, the first to acknowledge that innocence has been wholly swallowed up by experience; (3) no other Christian artist or seer has so fully directed his vision to history and experience; (4) to this day his is the only Christian vision that has openly or consistently accepted a totally fallen time and space as the paradoxical presence of eternity; (5) he stands alone among Christian artists in identifying the actual passion of sex as the most immediate epiphany of either a demonic or a redemptive «Energy,» just as he is the only Christian visionary who has envisioned the universal role of the female as both a redemptive and a destructive power; (6) his is the only Christian vision of the total kenotic movement of God or the Godhead; (7) he was the first Christian «atheist,» the first to unveil God as Satan; (8) he is the most Christocentric of Christian seers and artists; (9) only Blake has created a Christian vision of the full identity of Jesus with the individual human being (the «minute particular»); and (10) as the sole creator of a post-biblical Christian apocalypse, he has given Christendom its only vision of a total cosmic reversal of history.

But the man who, conscious of himself as an individual, judges with eternal responsibility, he is slow to pass judgment upon the unusual.

The evil of the world is that those elements which are translucent so far as transmission is concerned, in themselves are of slight weight; and that those elements with individual weight, by their discord, impose upon vivid immediacy the obligation that it fade into night.

In their view, books stressing contingency «offer a way forward, beyond the «old political history» and the new «social and cultural history» by a reunion of process and event,» In other words, what Individual people did — perhaps especially people who filled leading public posts — may be as genuinely significant as the ordinary forces acting upon ordinary people.

The generic characterization of the subjective forms which I describe in the next section as active in the formation of religious experience should be understood as depending upon, and leaving room for, a wide variety of historical embodiments, each with its own individual qualitative response.

A crucial question for the Roman Catholic community today, for example, is whether or not it can respond creatively to the challenge of individual voices as diverse as those of Hans Küng and Daniel Berrigan, and adapt its communal life to the demands for change that they place upon it.

It is Mankind as a whole, collective humanity, which is called upon to perform the definitive act whereby the total force of terrestrial evolution will be released and flourish; an act in which the full consciousness of each individual man will be sustained by that of every other man, not only the living but the dead.

He does not grasp the secret of its creativity, its ennobling effects upon even small entrepreneurs, and its reliance on many moral principles, such as honesty, hard work, habits of cooperation, and the daily inventiveness of individuals.

I am really surprised by TUF» response as I have not only accentuated the individual's personal responsibility, but also that God stated He looked upon man's heart.

Of the Bible she wrote, «I regard these writings as histories consisting of mingled truth and fiction, and while I admire and cherish much of what I believe to have been the moral teaching of Jesus himself, I consider the system of doctrines built upon the facts of his life... to be most dishonorable to God and most pernicious in its influence on individual and social happiness.»

Whitehead looks upon process as not only the appearance of new patterns among things, but the becoming of new subjects, which are completely individual, self - contained units of feeling.

These two definitions indicate, as they should, the same thing, because closed - upness is precisely the mute, and when it is to express itself, this must take place against its will, as the freedom which is the ground underlying unfreedom revolts upon entering into communication with the freedom without; it now betrays unfreedom, and the individual betrays himself against his will in anxiety....